SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 MarsdenLR 2855

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
TARIQUE AZAM – Appellant
Versus
HAMDAN MOHAMAD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. summary of case facts regarding the loan agreement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. criteria and considerations under order 14 for summary judgment. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)

[1] This is an appeal by the Plaintiff against the decision of the Sessions Court Judge dismissing his application for summary judgment against the Defendant. I allowed the appeal. These are the full reasons for my decision.

Salient Background Facts

[2] The Plaintiff was attached to Ranhill Berhad and its subsidiaries. The Defendant was a shareholder of all the companies to which the Plaintiff was attached and they have known each other for some time.

[3] The Plaintiff extended a loan to the Defendant in the sum of RM500,000.00 on 24 August 2008. The Plaintiff alleged that because he extended the loan to the Defendant using his wife's overdraft facility, the Defendant had agreed to pay him interest on the loan at the rate of 7.28% on daily rest which is the interest rate that has to be paid to the bank in respect of the overdraft facility.

[4] According to the Plaintiff, the Defendant has repaid him a sum of RM150,000.00 leaving a principal sum of RM350,000.00 unpaid and interest as at 30 N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top